Oh lord, yes, Bridge to Terabithia. My mom got it for me, without having read it herself or knowing much more about it than that it was a Newberry Medal winner. I was 7 or 8. I finished reading it and burst out of my bedroom in tears, angrily demanding to know why she got it for me with that ending! My first encounter with that kind of ending, I guess.

I was 11-12 when I read Lord of the Rings to my 2 younger brothers (took us the evenings of a whole year) who were 7 and 8 when we started, but neither got traumatized (I’d first read the book when I was 9). Maybe because we’d grown up on the properly gruesome old school fairy tales.

For us, it was “On My Honor”… which also won a Newberry medal, and also invovles one of the main characters dying tragically. Pretty sure I read Bridge to Terabithia, too. (Also did Old Yeller, but I think I was a little older at that point.)

Seriously, what is it with famous and/or award winning childrens’ books and people/animals dying tragically? On My Honor, Bridge to Terabithia, Where the Red Fern Grows, Old Yeller, Stone Fox… is it a desire of the award committee to watch children everywhere to suffer, because they don’t hate literature class enough, or is it more of a desire to pass on the important message “life sucks, everybody you love will die” from an early age?

Okay, go ahead and laugh. It wasn’t a book, but the first tragic, heroic death in a story that got me was in Independence Day……….[SPOLERS!!!!]……….when the one kid’s crazy dad sacrifices himself to take down the aliens.

Not being raised in a hunting subculture, I found the whole idea of coon-hunting baffling while reading “Where the Red Fern Grows”. I kept thinking: why? The character doesn’t use the meat or hide, these animals aren’t a real threat to him or his family, how is this even fun? Maybe it’s a generational thing, too. I never reread it.

The particularly traumatic one for me was the movie adaptation of “Ring of Bright Water”. Almighty Bastet, what an ending… I still remember the utter silence in the theatre as the credits began to scroll, realizing the other kids there likely felt just as betrayed.

It was a long time ago when I read it, but I know they used to sell raccoon fur. And perhaps they did feed the meat to the dogs. I mean, why wouldn’t they? Though I wouldn’t be surprised to hear they eat raccoon meat in some parts, even to this day.

There are some people, usually in the rural areas, but I’ve met some not so rural people that eat raccoon to this day.

Also there are some parts of the US where raccoons are a pest species. And while they look cute, they are nasty little critters. Plus with them liable to become rabid it makes a lot of sense to kill them.

I don’t remember much about Where the Red Fern Grows, I’ve found that with Newberry books. Very powerful at the time but completely forgettable. Probably since they all are pretty much the same: Happy, happy, happy, DEATH! CRY YOUR HEART OUT CHILDREN! THIS BOOK THIRSTS FOR YOUR TEARS! Pain may be a part of life, but eventually in book form it just loses its sting. I remember more of The Phantom Tollbooth and Bunnicula than Ol’ Yeller and Bridge to Terebithia.

Everybody writes happy endings. Doesn’t make them bad, they’re popular. Writing a sad ending that leaves a person thinking in the end is a little more difficult. Half the books people are saying traumatized them are my personal favorites, it takes skill to write about death with grace, tact and a measure of realism without making it a melodramatic farce – for kids who are having to cope with those issues reading about other people can help. Doesn’t help that this culture in general prefers to sweep death under the rug.

To the person not raised in a hunting subculture, in that time and era raccoon were pests on par with rats. They not only were carriers of rabies, they also destroyed crops, raided henhouses and are extremely destructive because they are super intelligent. Hunting wasn’t just about the hunt, it was also about ridding the area of a nuisance pest. To someone farming barely above subsistence level a coon raid could do serious damage. On top of that, you are mis-remembering the books – the kid was selling the hides, that combined with the money from the contest at the end is how they could finally afford to move to the city.

We raised a coon, they’re cute and cuddly as babies but a full grown coon is a scavenger that can easily take down a cat or small dog and should be respected as such. It isn’t a sweet, innocent woodland creature.

I can write death with grace and tact but I don’t usually for children’s books. I am debating whether my series is young adult or middle-grade before I send it off to the publishing gods for review. It does not have death until the second book, of any kind. I kept the first book “innocent” as a way to show more growth in the second I suppose, because the first is a pure adventure with an ending you don’t usually see presented in many others. I have received quite a bit of surprise and even shock from my relatives and friends who have read it so far. I suppose that can be good LOL.

You are correct about raccoons. There are some where I live and I live in the city. Do not mess with them. They are also potential rabies carriers along with squirrels and bats up here.

While we remember the tragic endings most of these books, they do impart lots of interesting social markers which are lost in this day and age otherwise. There are other books that are my favorites, however, that do not do the tragic death but also have some great cultures in them. Most are fiction:) To give you an idea, I absolutely love these books: Frankenstein, Far Seer/Quintaglio series (Robert Sawyer), H. Beam Piper’s Little Fuzzy series, Dragonriders of Pern series, anything Terry Pratchett wrote with Death in it… I guess I just like to read and write.

Is that the Japanese tale where the artist (owner of the cat) was hired to paint a picture of Buddha accepting all the animals, but the cat was an outcast due to cultural heritage reasons, and when the artist painted the cat in anyway he was told that his painting would be burned — but then, the next day, miraculously, the painting had changed to where the cat was sitting on Buddha’s knee, Buddha’s hand gently petting it, and the cat looking up at Buddha with utter adoration?

Because that was a pretty awesome tale, on par with The Selfish Giant (one of my favorites).

Well, now, hold on. I think I smell some favoritism going on here. Amanda gets called out for being negative. Fine. But then Selkie is negative, and Amanda actually provides some insight into the story they read — proving that she actually followed and paid attention to it — and gets in trouble just because she was aggressive about it? Why didn’t Selkie get called out for being negative?

“I think it’s craps that the dog died” is a perfectly valid – if un-nuanced – opinion to have about the story, and a decent discussion opener as she can then explain *why* she feels the dog got handed the short end of the stick there. That’s the kind of thing you *do* in english lit class.

And yes, Amanda’s analysis is likewise valid, and would be a viable counterargument if not for the ad hominem at the end.

I see a bit of… well, you know how if two things start out slightly different, concentrating on the differences makes them more different over time? That sort of thing. If Amanda is slightly worse than Selkie, but gets negative feedback all the time, that’s going to shape her, and shape the impressions of those around her.

When Amanda makes a valid counterargument and also calls someone a name, and the thing that gets pointed out is the name, rather than her understanding of the text, that focuses attention on the wrong part. Ideally a teacher (or parent) would go more like “No name-calling, Amanda. But you’re right that she sacrificed herself for (objective/character).” And then segue into a discussion of whether it’s appropriate to sacrifice yourself for a greater good, and where the line is between good reasons and stupid reasons to sacrifice yourself. That puts the focus back on the right aspect of her comment, while still ensuring that the class knows name-calling is not tolerated.

She didn’t specifically say she was referring to Selkie and Todd as fish and idiot. I mean, yes we know she is, but her teacher doesn’t know. She has no grounds for that one and seems like she’s just gonna probe Amanda for information about this ‘other woman’ and their play date.

Plus I mean, Amanda could have a pet fish and be calling someone or something else an idiot.

This is most likely not the first time Amanda uses the term fish or fishface with Miss Afkhami in earshot. Therefor she may guess this one. Her best guess for ‘idiot’ on the other hand would be ‘another kid Amanda doesn’t like, e.g. Georgie’.

Actually, at the beginning of the day they already complained that their parents were trying to start dating again (before they entered the school, previous comic), so it’s rather easy for the teacher to figure out that “Dinner with a fish and an idiot” means Selkie and one of the adults.

I don’t actually remember reading any stories about animals/pets dying, but that might have more to do with my memory than the school. I do remember reading “Hatchet” and “My Side of the Mountain”, so maybe my elementary school had a thing for survivalist children instead.

Actually telling a kid not to be negative is perfectly reasonable. If you let a kid grow up thinking the worse and feeling the worse about things, then they are only going to be a very negative adult. Trust me, I’ve seen it happen. I much prefer telling a kid to perk up than tell and adult they’re being paranoid.

Yeah, but telling a kid to perk up when they’re genuiely feeling upset/down, will only make them feel they’re not allowed to feel negative emotions. That can f*** you up as well, as I know from personal experience. (Not by my parents, it has to be said, but most other adults in my life.)

AH! you think the teacher is being insufficiently PC… you’re worried that the teacher may bruise her gentle tiny ego and make her into a megalomaniacal psychopath because the teacher was mean to her as a kid…

PFFT!, Yeah, right!… I remember my older brothers and sisters talking about the nuns at the catholic school they went to would use a ruler across the backs of the hands to correct infractions, and they turned out pretty good IMNSHO… i was the only one of us six to go to public school all the way thru, the next older sister went to the catholic one up till 9th then she was in public school for tenth till graduation. the other four: catholic the whole way.

Yeah, I went to a Montessori school for my early education, and if we didn’t finish our work on time, we weren’t allowed to eat. I’m not talking about having to wait to eat – I’m saying we DID NOT get to eat. The nuns would divide the confiscated food amongst themselves. I also heard about students being hung up in the closet by their belts.